Virgo in MIDFIELD....riiiiiiiighhht

[perseus]

OTT, Easy, but I guess you often mean to be. Virgs is talented enough to play anywhere, but his most effective position for us tonight was up front where his brilliant volley was the closest we got to scoring. He was not "lost" in midfield, though, and was an example of McGhee trying to replace the qualities we were missing with Chippy, box-to-box workrate and a shooting goal threat supporting the front 2 from midfield.

I agree with this. I would have thought that Virgs best position would be midfield. He could be a great goalscoring central midfielder.

However, there is no doubt it was a failure against Reading.

 

[SULLY COULDNT SHOOT]

In this case, I wasn't replying to you but to DO who was doubting his abilities as a forward.

But I will reply to you if you like, because I think your points banging on about Virgs being a huge failure in midfield don't stack up. That midfield was put together with the primary aim of keeping things tight and protecting the back four. It did that successfully. But as with all things, there is a cost, the defensive nature of the midfield meant our link with the front 2 was not good.

We have to make hard choices. McGhee was criticised for being too offensive against Wigan by playing an attacking 4-4-2, now he gets criticised for playing a defensive version of that formation tonight.

Here's the thing. Unfortunately we don't have the calibre of player to magically sort out the balance of our midfield in the absence of Chippy. We can keep things very tight and hope the front pair nick a goal, or we can bring creative but defensively weaker players like Leon back into the midfield to make it more creative. That's our basic choice. For anyone criticising the sound defensive performance tonight, I'd like to hear some realisation that the attacking option didn't go that swimmingly in the previous couple of games.

Bang on London. We just don't have the players (or the players in form) who can be tight AND creative at the mo. The first half no one would have scored against us (unless gifted by Rami early doors) but hell would've frozen over before we scored. The second, when we opened up and started to look dangerous, options for Reading appeared. Thought we were unlucky to lose but we played to our limits (especialyl when you lose three players to injury!) last night. Virgo may not have been the best choice for midfled (Hammond looked v.good) but I don't think it was a tactical error and again Virgs and Leon came out with credit from this game ( ditto Hammond and McCammon when he wasn't suffocating).

The big dissapointements were Oatway, who i thought was dreadul and (again) nathan when he came on. Rami was ok apart from a couple of indecisive moments in the first half.

 

[rool]

I agree with this. I would have thought that Virgs best position would be midfield. He could be a great goalscoring central midfielder.

However, there is no doubt it was a failure against Reading.

I seem to remember you always wanted to put Danny Cullip in midfield too.

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

Eaxactly! So he wont be doing it again.

 

[Turkey]

Virgo has improved so much though. Who was he over a year ago? A young defender who'd showed promise. He's really come into his own since the end of last season.

As has Hinshelwood, I recall he couldn't complete a pass last season. Wasn't there some ludicrous stat posted on here about his passing at one point. Look how much he's improved.

 

[Brighton Breezy]

Whilst I agree that Virgs is versatile it is ovbvious he is NOT a creative goal scoring midfielder.